From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: [PSEUDOPATCH] rename is_compat_task Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2015 06:01:48 +0100 Message-ID: <20151208050148.GA3968@gmail.com> References: <11525805.FykVOSlruZ@wuerfel> <20151208043648.GA2182@gmail.com> <20151208044937.GK20997@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mail-wm0-f54.google.com ([74.125.82.54]:35639 "EHLO mail-wm0-f54.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750750AbbLHFBx (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Dec 2015 00:01:53 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20151208044937.GK20997@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Al Viro Cc: Arnd Bergmann , Andy Lutomirski , Linus Torvalds , X86 ML , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , linux-arch , David Miller * Al Viro wrote: > On Tue, Dec 08, 2015 at 05:36:49AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > So are there any deep objections to doing this rename in a single, quick, > > pain-minimized fashion right at the end of the next merge window, when the > > amount of pending patches in various maintainer trees is at a cyclical > > minimum? We can also keep an is_compat_task() migratory define for one more > > cycle just in case. > > Again, what about sparc? There we have both 64bit and 32bit syscalls possible > to issue from the same process *and* no indication which trap had been used; how > do you implement is_compat_syscall() there? There's a TIF_32BIT, which is used > by mmap() and friends, signal delivery, etc., but that's not a matter of which > syscall flavour had been issued. Said that, arch/sparc doesn't use > is_compat_task(); it's open-coded everywhere... Hm, so if Sparc has no notion of compat-ness of the system call then how does it implement runtime compat checks, such as AUDIT_ARCH et al? Thanks, Ingo